MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2263224395 · doi:10.1097/mcc.0000000000000289

Increased pressure within the abdominal compartment

2016· review· en· W2263224395 on OpenAlexaff
Derek J. Roberts, Chad G. Ball, Andrew W. Kirkpatrick

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Critical Care · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Surgery and Complications
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAbdominal compartment syndromeLaparotomyIntensive care medicineAbdomenPercutaneousNegative-pressure wound therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article reviews recent developments related to intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH)/abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) and clinical practice guidelines published in 2013. RECENT FINDINGS: IAH/ACS often develops because of the acute intestinal distress syndrome. Although the incidence of postinjury ACS is decreasing, IAH remains common and associated with significant morbidity and mortality among critically ill/injured patients. Many risk factors for IAH include those findings suggested to be indications for use of damage control surgery in trauma patients. Medical management strategies for IAH/ACS include sedation/analgesia, neuromuscular blocking and prokinetic agents, enteral decompression tubes, interventions that decrease fluid balance, and percutaneous catheter drainage. IAH/ACS may be prevented in patients undergoing laparotomy by leaving the abdomen open where appropriate. If ACS cannot be prevented with medical or surgical management strategies or treated with percutaneous catheter drainage, guidelines recommend urgent decompressive laparotomy. Use of negative pressure peritoneal therapy for temporary closure of the open abdomen may improve the systemic inflammatory response and patient-important outcomes. SUMMARY: In the last 15 years, investigators have better clarified the pathogenesis, epidemiology, diagnosis, and appropriate prevention of IAH/ACS. Subsequent study should be aimed at understanding which treatments effectively lower intra-abdominal pressure and whether these treatments ultimately affect patient-important outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.275
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations60
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Critical CareSame topicAbdominal Surgery and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207